Feedback and SEL: Unraveling Some Concerns

Ruth Allio, URUTESOL, Montevideo, Uruguay

Tensions in the Horizon

As teachers, we sometimes have some hesitations regarding every “what” and “how” in the realm of feedback. I bet this dilemma might sound quite familiar to the reader: should I let the student finish the idea even when there are too many grammar mistakes, or should I stop the intervention immediately as I see a language problem that could hinder understanding?

To add insult to injury, our own students -who are also part of the equation- are probably wondering: “Why doesn’t she correct anything? I know I have several mistakes, so how will I ever correct them without any guidance whatsoever?” Worse still, they must even be thinking “How am I supposed to speak if this lady keeps interrupting, and I still do not grasp what she is trying to correct!”

If these situations do ring a bell, then this article will come in handy. Truth being said, we tend to feel uncomfortable when correcting students too often. We have a feeling that they will never speak again if we interrupt them -possibly because that is what we would do-.

Thus, we let them go on endlessly, wary of hurting or exposing them in front of others. Surprising as it may seem, our lovely students DO want to be corrected! They expect us to do that, and they feel disappointed if we do not. However, there are some important elements to be considered when it comes to offering feedback to students: Diaz and Painter Farrell (2016) point out that, “errors are important signposts of students’ learning development”. They tell us in which stage of their interlanguage they are.

Thus, we need to analyze some relevant aspects to proceed: first off, will our correction be disruptive? Or -rather- do I really need to correct this? After deciding that, we need to differentiate between errors and mistakes: while the former could be a sign of a deeper problem, the latter may be a simple slip, in which case we can let it slide for the sake of fluency and come back to it later on, should the need arise. We also need to think about our instructional objective regarding their outcomes: are we focusing on fluency or accuracy? To what extent is correcting now a clever move? Will it promote or hinder communication?

Once we decided that, we also need to decide who corrects: should we be the ones who intervene, or can another classmate help? Also, we should consider how to correct, that is, should we use the board and make a whole explanation, or should we incidentally mention the issue and move on?

It seems pretty clear that, even the most experienced teacher with the most outstanding level of mastery will have preposterous results if there is no reflection whatsoever on the impact that correction may have: in other words, it all comes down to knowing our students well enough to make informed decisions regarding what will work and what most certainly won’t.

Feedback Moves

According to Lyster and Ranta (1997), there are six different moves that a teacher can make when it comes to offering feedback: one such move is called explicit correction, which basically occurs when the teacher adequately rephrases the erroneous utterance and makes it very clear that the student had a problem with the construction. Another possibility is the recast, which occurs when the teacher paraphrases all or part of an utterance made by the student without putting the mistake in evidence, as some sort of echo.

The clarification request involves asking the student to rephrase what they just said either because it was not fully understood or because it contained a problem that the student could easily spot. On a different -and more demanding- note, the metalinguistic feedback involves providing comments, information or questions related to how that same utterance can be improved, without actually providing the correct form. Instead, it is a reminder of the correct form and invites the student to engage in self-correction.

Elicitation contains three specific moves: either providing an incomplete utterance for the student to complete with the right form, asking questions to elicit the correct form or asking the student directly to correct the utterance. Finally, with the repetition move, the teacher explicitly repeats the student’s error adjusting the intonation to highlight it.

In all of these moves, we range from implicit to explicit, being the recast on one extreme and the metalinguistic explanation on the antipodes. It seems quite obvious that every single decision made regarding feedback will have to stem from our knowledge and understanding of our students, so as to show them that we care about them.

To Care or Not to Care?

There is a very important insight made by Diaz and Painter Farrel (2016), who pinpointed a series of steps that teachers can use when giving feedback: interestingly enough, each step begins with the letters of the word CARE. For instance, “C” stands for clarify, and that implies asking ss questions regarding areas you are not sure students have fully grasped.

“A” stands for acknowledge, that is, to explicitly state what you have found particularly impressive, innovative or strong in their performance or understanding. “R” stands for reflect, and it has to do with stating the problem you spotted by relating it to concrete evidence and ask the student to suggest ways of improving or suggest them yourself. Finally, “E” stands for empower, and it entails helping the student set learning targets and identify resources he needs to actually meet those targets.

Put that way, it seems easier than it actually is, but how do we come to terms with all of that? How can we make that happen in real life? We are all familiar with rubrics, checklists, scripts and each of those guidelines that help students know what we expect. As a matter of fact, feedback can be directive -when used to tell students exactly what needs to be revised- or facilitative -when used to provide comments or suggestions to help guide their own revision-.

Feedback then should heal the breach between current and desired performance, either by offering data on how to improve inappropriate language or reducing the cognitive load presented by the content. Thus, only when feedback serves either of those purposes can it be called corrective and mindful.

Speaking of being mindful, I feel tempted to say that it all directs us back to our words, to the way in which we offer feedback to students. Let us never forget that our students trust us, they expect us to be models in every possible way, taking care not only of their learning process but also of their emotional wellbeing. This being so, we need to ascertain that words are powerful and can be used to either lift people up or knock them down.

We need to carefully select the terms to be used when giving feedback, mostly in an attempt to build a constructiveenvironment, which is conducive to meaningful learning. That is precisely where mindfulness comes into being: in fact, because teaching and learning are inherent to human nature, the notion of empathyshould not fade into oblivion.

By definition, social and emotional learning (SEL) is: “the process through which children and adults acquire and effectively apply the knowledge, attitudes and skills necessary to understand and manage emotions, set and achieve positive goals, feel and show empathy for others, establish and maintain positive relationships and make responsible decisions”.

This approach comprises five core competences that “educate hearts, inspire minds and help people navigate the world more effectively”: self-awareness, self-management, social awareness, relationship skills and responsible decision making, all of which meant to be used in every context.

A Bit of a Round-Up

I believe that, as teachers, we are accountable for the decisions we make regarding every possible instructional aspect. We use words, or maybe we omit them, but in both cases, we are deciding, and so is the person who receives feedback. Paying lip service to the importance of feedback is simply acknowledging failure and even embracing it.

I am more than fed up with people making detrimental comments about our role. I guess we need to go back to the basics: it is about time we empower ourselves and make a difference in our classrooms, becoming not only the best versions of ourselves, but also the teachers our students need and the agents of change that our society demands. The question is, do we have what it takes to do that?

References

Díaz Maggioli, G., & Painter-Farrell, L. (2016). Lessons learned. Richmond.

Allio, R., & Delbono, N. (2017). To speak or not to speak: The power underlying feedback choices. ANEP, FLA.

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (n.d.). Strategies for gathering

student feedback. In CASEL school guide. Retrieved September 9, 2025, from https://schoolguide.casel.org/resource/strategies-for-gathering-student-feedback/

Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. (n.d.). What is the CASEL

framework? In Fundamentals of SEL. Retrieved September 9, 2025, from https://casel.org/fundamentals-of-sel/what-is-the-casel-framework/

Prof. Ruth Allio is a 42-year-old teacher who graduated back in 2017 and got her tenure in 2024. She has been teaching for more than ten years both at private and public institutions. She also tutors CAE students since 2019. At the moment, she is finishing two masters, one in applied linguistics from FUNIBER and the other in English Language from ANEP-UDELAR. She has been a presenter on many occasions in the past and has taken countless courses from various entities. She has been a member of the URUTESOL board since 2023, currently performing the roles of Vice President and Community Manager.